Re: "CURIE Syntax 1.0" 20 October 2005
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2005-10-21-curie
several recommendations:
1. Help readers understand the status of this document, specifically:
2. Change the style sheet to be the Editor's Draft style sheet, per
"Style for Group-internal Drafts" [1] as this is not yet a W3C Note.
[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/03/28-editor-style.html
3. Add "produced in the context of the RDF-in-HTML Task Force
of the Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment and HTML
Working Groups" to the Status of this Document section, with
links to [2, 3, 4] respectively.
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/
[3] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/
[4] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Group/
4. In 1 Motivation, add "URIs can be expressed /+in XML+/ using QNames.
5. In 2 Usage, clarify whether an empty namespace prefix (":foo") is
meant to be interpreted the same as an absent namespace prefix
("foo"). Both are currently specified to use the "current base URL"
but it might be more natural (esp. under our Tuesday discussion)
to use the current default namespace.
6. 2.2 Ambiguities. Some readers will ask why we're proposing a new
mechanism rather than use XML entities. I recommend we anticipate
that question with an answer somewhere close this example.
7. The last example in 2.2 declares 'company' as a namespace prefix
then uses something else that hasn't been declared. This obscures
the intention of the example.
used